Cyclist cleared of manslaughter.

Either, not wither...

I must say that most of the cyclists we encounter on the stretch of road I mentioned (which we have to use to visit the family) are fine - irritating but fine!! They cycle singly and there is an occasional opportunity to overtake safely. However, sometimes there are a bunch of them or two abreast who just think that they own the whole road.

And there lies the real problem: people get irritated because someone is going slower than they are. Drivers, cyclists, walkers. All the same, essentially. We are very intolerant, impatient animals.

Round here it's car and lorry drivers who chuck litter onto the verges.

Isn't it sad that one of his lies ( there were others) that she was using her phone is believed still by some people on this thread and therefore feeds into the narrative of how culpable he was? It must be dreadful for her widower to see this particular lie repeated so often. As for his lack of remorse- I believe sentencing is to take place next month - no doubt his solicitor is busy finding him 'an how to sound remorseful course' as we speak. I rather thought the judge was too helpful in her comments about the complete lack of remorse shown - she shouldn't have given him any pointers/ hints as to how to behave when he returns for sentencing. My understanding is that the maximum is 2 years in prison - if he's coached well enough, who knows? All suspended?

But these days anyone on the road should be aware that pedestrians may be using their phones or perhaps wearing headphones and not concentrating 100% on what is happening. It's like being aware of children playing near the road. You have to expect the unexpected - and not be riding or driving with no brakes. Shouting warnings and swerving round pedestrians at speed doesn't cut it.

He had his horrible skull tattoo done on his neck after the incident - and grew his hair over it for court. It seems that, having had his hair cut when the case ended, he's now happy to reveal the ugly thing.

The judge has ordered a pre-sentence report. That means she's considering a jail sentence.

I am of the opinion that the person least likely to cause maiming or death is more likely to be in the right than those who can cause more damage. That does not include those who by their actions are likely to act in a way that endangers others. So a pedestrian is least likely to cause harm or death but should obviously take care not to act in a way as to endanger other road users. A bicycle will cause less harm than a car. Would we allow cars without brakes on the road ? I don't think so. When I learned to drive I was told I was in charge of a killing machine and it was my responsibility to watch out for others. I still believe that is true today. We need to revise laws which state you must use the road if on a bicycle or in a car, not the pavement. You must obey the Highway Code. You cannot go through a red light if pedestrians are crossing etc. To me it is just plain common sense. Children are very unpredictable and it is every road user's responsibility to watch out for them.

Perhaps growing his hair to hide the skull tattoo on his neck , (complete with blood tears, which is said to represent killing someone) from the jury did him a favour although he seemed rather hasty to have his hair cut to "show it off" as soon as the jury retired.

My post from this afternoon (above) Elrel I agree he seems quite proud of it now that he has been cleared of manslaughter.

I cycle a lot locally but never uncontrollably. Any vehicle what ever the means of propulsion can be a lethal weapon in careless hands. The bike in question was illegal for road use and being ridden without due consideration for others. As a pedestrian I've had two near misses with irresponsible cyclists. The first stepping out of door onto the pavement having to jump back to avoid a speeding youth. The second at some pedestrian lights when traffic was stopped and speeding cyclists just ignored them, again I had to quickly step back. The point is that most cyclists even though who sometimes ride on the pavement because the roads aren't safe for us respect other road / pavement users giving them and us enough time and space to avoid accidents. This guy is sadly typical of the lack of civic responsible prevalent is society showing little regard his fellow human beings. The law as is seems impotent in dealing with which such people. He should be prosecuted for manslaughter in the same way as he would have been if he'd punched somewhere and caused their death even if he hadn't intended such harm. He didn't intend to hit the lady but by riding recklessly on the road braking laws his actions showed a total lack of responsibility to the point of deliberately criminality.

Sorry to typing errors - but Gransnet has no edit option!

And I spot them as soon as I have posted - but it's too late to fix them then.

She's considering prison because that's in the sentencing guidelines but mitigation will be part of the report -this will include his showing remorse ( or saying he does). The lies he told hopefully will weigh heavily against him

Also of course there is the PTSD 'card' in play

Absolutely disgusting thing, he is. I hope he will get a just sentence, but fear he won't.
I think he is an absolute piece of shit, frankly.

I totally agree MissAdventure. Unbelievably revolting young thug. His attitude beggars belief, if I were the judge he'd get five years with no remission! but sadly he won't!

I agree too Miss Adventure. What on earth do his family think of him!

He can only get a maximum of 2 - that's why the widowers wants a change in the law. Given the inadequacy of the current law, I think the CPS did well to a) charge him with manslaughter and b) came up with the Victorian second charge which at least means he's now got a criminal record

I think Andrea Leadsom introduced a bill about dangerous cycling but it only got one reading then did not reach the second reading.

What a pity, this law needs updating asap.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13034162
This needs to be introduced again, or something very similar.

Maybe Andrea Leadsoms bill can be reintroduced and this time taken seriously. Here's for hoping!!

From the BBC:

"A cyclist who knocked over and killed a 44-year-old woman in east London has been sentenced to 18 months in a young offenders' institution."

"Alliston, now 20, raised his eyebrows as the judge said his sentence would be custodial."

What a piece of work...

Nowhere near long enough! So, if you've ever a mind to murder, do it on a bike. I suppose at least he raised his eyebrows - hopefully in horror that he will actually go to prison.

It will likely be half that time for good behaviour, however a custodial sentence, loss of liberty is good.Why not prison if he is 20?

Why a young offenders institution if a lad can go to war at 18 drive a car at 17 get married at what is it 16 ( with parental permission ) drink alcohol, kill someone but a 20 year old is too young for prison
Something wrong here
He ll be out in less than a year and be top of the tree in a junior institution I would think cocky little xxxx